Question
Gramps,
I believe that humans have been around for a very, very long time. The whole thing about the earth being just 6000 years old doesn’t bother me that much because I don’t believe that’s the Church’s official stance. However, I believe that Adam and Eve were on the earth much longer than 6000 years ago. I’ve seen some of your stuff about Adam and Eve happening in 4000 BC, but I have other beliefs that conflict with that. Does that go against official church doctrine?
Alston
Answer
Alston,
To answer your question directly, I’m not aware of any official Church position on a date for the first when the events of the Garden of Eden occurred. There is also no official position on what aspects of biological evolution (a-la natural selection) are factual vs conjecture. But more importantly, we need to acknowledge this point:
That which we consider to be an archaeological discovery of Homo Sapiens does not necessarily equate to what we might call a “Child of God.” The fossil remains of the bodies are merely the elements of the dust of the earth. A Child of God is determined by the nature of the spirit entombed inside that body.
I’m afraid there is no scripture, no prophecy (as far as I’m aware), and certainly no scientific knowledge describing when that differentiation took place. The timeline of when Adam and Eve walked the earth is only described by tradition, not historical records. So much of their story from the Bible is allegory (including the names Adam and Eve) that it is difficult to extract out the literal facts from the spiritual message told by their story.
We do know that the couple whom we call our first parents did, indeed, exist. We also know that there was a Garden of Eden. When was that? Who were they? What were their real mortal names? We don’t know.
The Garden of Eden.
So, the question I’d ask you is this: Does it matter?
We don’t read the Bible to learn about the birthdates of a couple of celebrities. We read the Bible to learn of our relationship with God. And the best way for us to learn about that relationship is with a literal reading. The stories told in the Bible tell us who we are and about our relationship with Him.
It would be simply impractical to read a literal history, it would fill up the entire Library of Congress and would mean nothing to us. The important bits were spread throughout time at such a gradual pace, that we simply couldn’t see the important bits nor how they were connected.
So, the “historian” who wrote the books in our current format wrote it in allegorical form to provide the most succinct message that we can glean from the annals of history regarding our origins and relationship with God. If we are to get any real benefit from such a prolonged history, a literal telling would be meaningless. But if we treat the “history” of Adam and Eve as we have it as if it were literal, the messages become very clear.
Finally, it is important to remember that I am NOT saying this is a made-up story. It is not. I’m saying that the story is not written for the purpose of historical authenticity. Its purpose is to provide a much more important truth that has so many layers to it that no piece of literature on the planet can compete with it.
We also don’t know which parts really were historical vs. allegorical. So, we can’t just write this off as “literature.” We should regard that story with the respect it deserves.
The story is not about when they lived. It is about how they lived. And we can learn so much from that.
Gramps
